General British politics discussion thread

Joe_ Public

Aegir wrote: »

well they clearly aren't sat in Hartlepool thinking "ooh, more taxes and the chance to go on strike, can't wait".

I can't see Labour offering anything at the moment that they haven't been for the last fifty years, with the exception of the Blair years.

Maybe Starmer is the new Neil Kinnock and will spend his time battling with the lunatic fringe and this will pave the way for a new Blair to come in and make the changes it needs.

Interesting, as i seem to recall only very recently labour actually opposing the tories proposed hike on corporation tax. Also, the tories have been introducing myriad tax increases over the past decade but it never gets any traction. It's the political equivalent of that old Mark Twain saying about the guy who with the reputation as an early riser being able to sleep till dawn.

Joe_ Public

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Interesting, as i seem to recall only very recently labour actually opposing the tories proposed hike on corporation tax. Also, the tories have been introducing myriad tax increases over the past decade but it never gets any traction. It's the political equivalent of that old Mark Twain saying about the guy who with the reputation as an early riser being able to sleep till dawn.

you completely missed my point.

Joe_ Public

Aegir wrote: »

you completely missed my point.

I think i get your point, just when i see terms like "lunatic fringe" thrown around, I'm not really that interested tbh.

CelticRambler

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Sure and this is where the blatantly unfit-for-purpose media owned by half a dozen or so oligarchs comes into play. The result is people voting Conservative to undo problems caused by the Conservative party.

Perfectly matched by economically depressed and chronically ill Republican voters in the USA voting Republican to undo the problems caused by Republicans.

On the one hand, it's easy to accuse the media of perpetuating myths and tropes; but unfortunately (for functioning democracies) the general voting public is perfectly capable of maintaining its own delusions, even in the face of black-and-white written information to the contrary.

Joe_ Public

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I think i get your point, just when i see terms like "lunatic fringe" thrown around, I'm not really that interested tbh.

you clearly didn't, otherwise you wold have responded as such.

CelticRambler wrote: »

Perfectly matched by economically depressed and chronically ill Republican voters in the USA voting Republican to undo the problems caused by Republicans.

On the one hand, it's easy to accuse the media of perpetuating myths and tropes; but unfortunately (for functioning democracies) the general voting public is perfectly capable of maintaining its own delusions, even in the face of black-and-white written information to the contrary.

and this perfect example of middle class left wing arrogance is exactly why traditional Labour voters are leaving the party in droves.

The working class is the heart of the Labour party, but it seems the middle class core just consider them to be too stupid to understand what is good for them.

Joe_ Public

Aegir, i responded to you perfectly as far as I'm concerned. You were talking about those working class voters objecting to labour taking more of their hard earned out of their pockets. So why were they backing labour before 2019? Why didn't they switch before if they were worried about their pockets? Maybe it's something different that is driving these shifting patterns.

Sam Russell

Aegir wrote: »

you clearly didn't, otherwise you wold have responded as such.



and this perfect example of middle class left wing arrogance is exactly why traditional Labour voters are leaving the party in droves.

The working class is the heart of the Labour party, but it seems the middle class core just consider them to be too stupid to understand what is good for them.

I would put it differently.

Any working class voter that votes Tory is too stupid to understand what is good for then. Alf Garnet is one of those - a racist, misogynist, ignorant, stupid character, well drawn to be made a figure of fun by his contradicting viewpoints and beliefs.

(Coincidentally, the actor (Tony Booth) playing Alf Garnet's son in law was the father in law of Tony Blair.)

CelticRambler

Aegir wrote: »

and this perfect example of middle class left wing arrogance is exactly why traditional Labour voters are leaving the party in droves.

Interesting leap from my example citing Republicans, who'd be closer in ideology to the Tories, to "middle class left wing arrogance".

As it happens, I was thinking of a recent thread on boards.ie (nothing to do with politics) where about three quarters of the responses to a poster advised waiting at least thirty minutes for something, when all the printed instructions say no more than thirty minutes, max. That's advice that I helped correct twenty years ago, but a generation and a half later, even with the instruction clearly printed on product labels and repeated on every relevant website, a surprising proportion of people cannot get it round the right way.

That's a misconception that should be really simple to fix; changing something more complex like political bias is a whole other challenge. Probably more so today than before, as voters' attention span has deteriorated and the Googles and Facebooks of this world go out of their way to not show us information that doesn't match what they think we want to know.

Akrasia

Peregrinus wrote: »

Not even Johnson can sell another election to the public as a vaccine dividend, or any kind of dividend!

He absolutely could and a percentage of his supporters absolutely would fall for it

He can frame it as 'having achieved everything in our last manifesto (which was basically nothing except 'get brexit done') he can refer to how voters in 2019 'Lent him their votes' (from his victory speech) and now that he has achieved the manifesto, he wants to go back to them to get their 'renewed support' for the next phase of the Uk's development which is only possible at this time because he has 'conquered covid' with their 'world beating' vaccine rollout

More seriously, I wouldn't assume - and Johnson certainly shouldn't assume - that in a year's time he will enjoy the same polling advantage that he does now. Right now the big plus is that the UK is so far advanced with its vaccination programme, which makes it look very successful compared to other countries. In a year's time, that gap won't be there, and people may be taking a somewhat longer view of the pandemic, which will include not just the plus of the UK's early vaccination, but the very many minuses of other aspects of pandemic management. And the shine of having "got Brexit done" may also have rubbed off a bit, as the medium-term consequences of Brexit are becoming undeniable and as the Brexit-related stuff in the media continues to go on and on and on. Having "got Brexit done" means that the UK will be permanently preoccupied with its relations with Europe, and people may not be altogether pleased when they realise that.

All of this means he might actually call a snap election to ride on the coat-tails of good will before people start to reflect on the true damaging cost of brexit and the unnecessary loss of life due to the UK's delayed responses to Covid

I'm not saying he will call an election, but I'd say he certainly is considering it given that he is on a high now, and people are prepared to ignore blatant corruption because of the vaccine feel good factor, and there is only one way he'll go from here with banana skins lurking everywhere

CelticRambler

CelticRambler wrote: »

Interesting leap from my example citing Republicans, who'd be closer in ideology to the Tories, to "middle class left wing arrogance".

As it happens, I was thinking of a recent thread on boards.ie (nothing to do with politics) where about three quarters of the responses to a poster advised waiting at least thirty minutes for something, when all the printed instructions say no more than thirty minutes, max. That's advice that I helped correct twenty years ago, but a generation and a half later, even with the instruction clearly printed on product labels and repeated on every relevant website, a surprising proportion of people cannot get it round the right way.

That's a misconception that should be really simple to fix; changing something more complex like political bias is a whole other challenge. Probably more so today than before, as voters' attention span has deteriorated and the Googles and Facebooks of this world go out of their way to not show us information that doesn't match what they think we want to know.

that is a problem, I would agree. Everything is right here, right now and there is no ability to work things out for yourselves. We saw plenty of that during the early days of the pandemic.

The thing is though, in places like Hartlepool, the only changing of political bias is away from Labour in what could be ground breaking in two ways. Not just labour losing a seat they have held since 1974, but also a sitting government winning a westminster by-election, which rarely happens.

There is something fundamental happening here and trying to write it off as too many people read the Daily Mail simply can not be true.

Rjd2

https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1389489509671256064

That should just be as worrying for Labour as Hartlepool.

I like Keir, but its a mammoth job he has.

He has to unite two different factions of Labour who clearly loath each other.

The working class socially conservative and the more metropolitan, student lefty younger voters. Biden somehow managed it in America to an extent due to how horrific Trump was but not sure Keir can pull of the same trick.

listermint

Aegir wrote: »

that is a problem, I would agree. Everything is right here, right now and there is no ability to work things out for yourselves. We saw plenty of that during the early days of the pandemic.

The thing is though, in places like Hartlepool, the only changing of political bias is away from Labour in what could be ground breaking in two ways. Not just labour losing a seat they have held since 1974, but also a sitting government winning a westminster by-election, which rarely happens.

There is something fundamental happening here and trying to write it off as too many people read the Daily Mail simply can not be true.

There in lies the problem you are narrowing it down to that. I include Facebook and Twitter in media because that is what they are. People are being exposed today to hundreds of snippets of information voxpops with no basis in facts. Even for example the current tory mayoral candidate telling lies on a daily basis about his opponent. These lies go unchallenged and filter out into people's phones in seconds and cannot be retracted easily.

So you are saying it's easy for people to be informed in this day and age.


I'd argue. It's not. It's a literal soup of disinformation and we want the average working Brit to find the carrots in it.

listermint

Rjd2 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1389489509671256064

That should just be as worrying for Labour as Hartlepool.

I like Keir, but its a mammoth job he has.

He has to unite two different factions of Labour who clearly loath each other.

The working class socially conservative and the more metropolitan, student lefty younger voters. Biden somehow managed it in America to an extent due to how horrific Trump was but not sure Keir can pull of the same trick.

I don't think Keir is the man for the Job frankly. He doesn't have the political legacy Biden had and he doesn't have the likeability that attracts floating voters

beggars_bush

listermint wrote: »

I don't think Keir is the man for the Job frankly. He doesn't have the political legacy Biden had and he doesn't have the likeability that attracts floating voters

He's just a bit boring really

Joe_ Public

Rjd2 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1389489509671256064

That should just be as worrying for Labour as Hartlepool.

I like Keir, but its a mammoth job he has.

He has to unite two different factions of Labour who clearly loath each other.

The working class socially conservative and the more metropolitan, student lefty younger voters. Biden somehow managed it in America to an extent due to how horrific Trump was but not sure Keir can pull of the same trick.

I've said before, there is a lot to learn from biden if it can be applied and adapted for a uk election. A big part of bidens win was community activism, the way they got out the vote in areas that traditionally voted republican. Georgia was remarkable, for example, but that took years of work and if labour was interested in following that example, they'd need to have started by now. I saw a recent report in which it was stated the partys community network was ok, but there was room for vast improvement. To me, that is an absolute imperative if they're serious about gaining power.

Nody

Aegir wrote: »

There is something fundamental happening here and trying to write it off as too many people read the Daily Mail simply can not be true.

From everything I've seen basically they decided to try Tories instead simply because Labour achieved nothing previously for them. The problem is way more fundamental than what the voters believe in the sense of "give us well paid union jobs back in production like the 60s" simply because those jobs are not available. It's the fact the whole job market has drastically changed but they still believe they can go back to the "good old days" again. It's exactly the same issue in USA and Trump with Trump promising he could turn back the clock basically.

That's the fundamental problem the politicians have not been able to explain or deliver on and never will. Because that would involve explaining how the world have moved on to an audience seeking easy answers ("them foreigners steal our jobs"). Add in it would involve actually a mammoth job to turn things around which would involve more money and time than any government can spend on them. They would need to move to something similar to the Danish system and make sure people actually get upskilled which is not cheap nor quick to do. Don't get me wrong, I'm quite sure you can retrain a factory worker to program but it's not something you do in 3 months and you'd need a serious wad of cash, time and a good leader to deliver it.

And that's were the crux sits; Tories could not give a damn and Labour still thinks the answer is bring back industry to have factory workers to vote for them. Neither wants to tackle the actual issue because that's difficult and not a soundbite that you can throw out to catch people's ears. And that will keep driving a significant chunk of people to buy into the next snake oil salesman promises of easy fixes and people to blame for their woes.

Leroy42

Labour do have some ideas, but it always strikes me that they are happy to to create ideas, they don't seem to test them against the pushback they will invariably get.

The national broadband for everyone. Simple, almost a necessity at this stage and really important to enable the forgotten regions to level up. But it was lost because they didn't articulate it correctly. They seem to simply think that everyone should instantly see the common sense on agree. But common sense is not so common and they were forced to talk about costs rather than benefits.

The idea was dead once it went to taking about costs.

Part of the problem is the media, but then they need to find a way around that. Local activists, plenty of communications. Town hall meeting to explain their solutions.

Joe_ Public

Leroy42 wrote: »

Labour do have some ideas, but it always strikes me that they are happy to to create ideas, they don't seem to test them against the pushback they will invariably get.

The national broadband for everyone. Simple, almost a necessity at this stage and really important to enable the forgotten regions to level up. But it was lost because they didn't articulate it correctly. They seem to simply think that everyone should instantly see the common sense on agree. But common sense is not so common and they were forced to talk about costs rather than benefits.

The idea was dead once it went to taking about costs.

Part of the problem is the media, but then they need to find a way around that. Local activists, plenty of communications. Town hall meeting to explain their solutions.

I do agree mostly, but what could they have done differently with the broadband policy? People immediately latched onto the cost factor. I dont know how they could have got around that. I recall discussion on here at the time, posters asking but what about the BT shareholders? It brought me back to the cant burn the bondholders after the 2008 crash.

Was it just an idea ahead of its time? O
Tony Blair was one of those who mocked it, said it "stretched credulity" or words to that effect. But I've noticed over the past few months, Blair has become a passionate advocate for universal broadband, never a mention of his initial scepticism or what was wrong with it when initially proposed.

Joe_ Public

Just reading the history of Hartlepool constituency and i think the most astonishing thing is that the lib dems were within 2,000 votes of winning the seat after Mandelson quit in 2004. And this despite the fact their candidate, a blow in, wrote on her campaign blog that everyone she met on the campaign trail was "either drunk, flanked by an angry dog or undressed." Funny things by-elections sometimes.

cantwbr1

[quote="Nutkins;117085540"
It'll be interesting to see how the Irish commentariat will spin this after weeks of predicting " sleaze " will be the undoing of Johnson.
Quite clearly the electorate think those who pontificate on the curtains of Number 10 should pull themselves together.
[/quote]

I think that many Irish people will look at the curtains/wallpaper issues and think of the similarities with Taoisigh with a taste for Charvet shirts or no bank accounts and how well they worked out

serfboard

Nody wrote: »

an audience seeking easy answers ("them foreigners steal our jobs").

The things is that the actual easy answers that will help solve the problem - "the billionaires are paying no tax", or "our country is facilitating massive tax evasion" - are never heard from the billionaire-controlled press and are blocked at every possible stage by a Tory government controlled by the oligarchy.

cantwbr1

Nutkins wrote: »

True, but the difference is the Irish taxpayer paid for those through corruption whereas over here Boris is seen as cadging off a few mates because he's broke.

Charlie and Bertie used the exact same excuse.

serfboard

serfboard wrote: »

The things is that the actual easy answers that will help solve the problem - "the billionaires are paying no tax", or "our country is facilitating massive tax evasion" - are never heard from the billionaire-controlled press y.

isn't this thread about the UK?

Strazdas

cantwbr1 wrote: »

Charlie and Bertie used the exact same excuse.

But were eventually found out. One wonders if the British media have the gumption to expose Johnson and leave him in total disgrace as happened to the Irish pair.

L1011

Strazdas wrote: »

But were eventually found out. One wonders if the British media have the gumption to expose Johnson and leave him in total disgrace as happened to the Irish pair.

If what is known about him to now has not left him in total disgrace, what on earth will? I'm not even sure the Edwin Edwards quote actually occuring would do him in now.

Peregrinus

Nutkins wrote: »

True, but the difference is the Irish taxpayer paid for those through corruption whereas over here Boris is seen as cadging off a few mates because he's broke.

What you're saying, I think, is that Irish voters care about corruption but English voters don't.

Which may be correct.

If it is, that creates a problem for the Labour party, but a much bigger problem for the UK.

listermint

Nutkins wrote: »

British politics has a tradition of MPs resigning or bring forced out over financial and personal impropriety.
Indeed the very latest is what caused the Hartlepool by-election today after the sitting MP stepped down because he's facing an Employment Tribunal, not even criminal charges.
There are also five separate inquiries going on over the allegations concerning Johnson.
Five.
My point is that unless there is real corruption found - that Johnson took taxpayers money for personal gain - the voters appear to think it's not a serious matter compared to the work of governing.
It's the British equivalent of the Gallic shrug when issues over the personal lives of French politicians emerge.
Wallpaper and curtains from John Lewis will not be on that many UK voters' minds today.

Your post appears to have glossed over the billions handed out to Tory donors over the last year to freshly minted companies with absolutely zero experience or contacts in the sectors.

It's almost as if you want to avoid what's staring you in the face and substitute it for economically juvenile flag waving which will be proceeded swiftly by massive budget cuts and sell offs of national institutions.

We're told daily the NHS is the holy grail but it's already being chopped up. Excuse me for thinking the voters are either being told lies or simply aren't very bright.

Leroy42

Nutkins wrote: »

British politics has a tradition of MPs resigning or bring forced out over financial and personal impropriety.
Indeed the very latest is what caused the Hartlepool by-election today after the sitting MP stepped down because he's facing an Employment Tribunal, not even criminal charges.
There are also five separate inquiries going on over the allegations concerning Johnson.
Five.
My point is that unless there is real corruption found - that Johnson took taxpayers money for personal gain - the voters appear to think it's not a serious matter compared to the work of governing.
It's the British equivalent of the Gallic shrug when issues over the personal lives of French politicians emerge.
Wallpaper and curtains from John Lewis will not be on that many UK voters' minds today.

That would all have some credit except that the government are not sticking up for Law and Order, they are respecting the institutions of the state and they doing a good job of governing.

There are a multiple of reasons why Johnson remains popular but none of them aligns with your post.

Getting Brexit done would be a major one, although nobody actually seems to like the deal he agreed or the new realities, so much so that the government had to delay its introduction.

Media bias, lack of action by Labour, lack of critical thinking, giving up on politics and just voting for the TV fella.

Whatever it is, it is deeply worrying that the voters in the UK are so disinterested in holding those in power to account.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

That would all have some credit except that the government are not sticking up for Law and Order, they are respecting the institutions of the state and they doing a good job of governing.

There are a multiple of reasons why Johnson remains popular but none of them aligns with your post.

Getting Brexit done would be a major one, although nobody actually seems to like the deal he agreed or the new realities, so much so that the government had to delay its introduction.

Media bias, lack of action by Labour, lack of critical thinking, giving up on politics and just voting for the TV fella.

Whatever it is, it is deeply worrying that the voters in the UK are so disinterested in holding those in power to account.

And of course, your opinion is not formed by media bias and a lack of critical thinking, just everyone else’s

Roanmore

Nutkins wrote: »

British politics has a tradition of MPs resigning or bring forced out over financial and personal impropriety.
Indeed the very latest is what caused the Hartlepool by-election today after the sitting MP stepped down because he's facing an Employment Tribunal, not even criminal charges.
There are also five separate inquiries going on over the allegations concerning Johnson.
Five.
My point is that unless there is real corruption found - that Johnson took taxpayers money for personal gain - the voters appear to think it's not a serious matter compared to the work of governing.
It's the British equivalent of the Gallic shrug when issues over the personal lives of French politicians emerge.
Wallpaper and curtains from John Lewis will not be on that many UK voters' minds today.

If that's your definition of corruption then it's either a very narrow one or you are spinning the Tory definition of corruption.
Several high profile Tories were on the news last week spinning the "no tax payers money was involved so nothing to see here".
The Tory donors paid for the flat refurbishment, the Tory party covered it and spun it as a loan. Most of the big contracts for PPE went to Tory donors with no tendering process, that smells like corruption to me.
You said there was no real corruption found, that's because even though the Police have been urged to do so they have not looked in to it (or at least have not publicly stated) and instead we have an investigation set up by Johnson to investigate Johnson and guess who decides if something is wrong, yes Johnson.